First, I totally get why California is nuts re: the environment. The whole bit where I was driving down into the Central Valley and couldn't see 50 feet in front of my face because of the smog was downright creepy.

With that said, can you guys hold off a bit until they come out with quick-recharging batteries so I can actually use my car for more than 100 miles a day, and then wait some more until they come out with electric cars that I can actually fit into? There's no freaking way I can drive an electric Prius. I can't even get into a new Camry.

As others have alluded to, the "Auto Industry" whining would carry a lot more weight if they hadn't screamed doom and gloom about every other minor emissions improvement California has forced them to make in the last 30 years.

Fark snow days, here in SoCal we used to have "Smog Days" where we weren't allowed to do recess or lunch outside since the air quality was dangerously bad. That stuff doesn't happen anymore - the air IS much cleaner. The car companies still manage to make money selling cars here, despite all their assurances that such regulations would put them out of business.

There's no freaking way I can drive an electric Prius. I can't even get into a new Camry.

Then eat a carrot ya fat fark.

It's mostly a tall thing. When I'm in an airplane, my head is bouncing off the ceiling, and my shoulders are over the top of the chairs. So if the doors are X inches tall, and I need Y inches of space for my head, back, and shoulders, and Y > X, I can't get into the car. (And since I'm fairly wide as well, bending is usually counterproductive, since it makes me need even more height to make the angle)

With the Prius, it's the whole clamshell thing. My head goes straight up to the top of the roof, the top of the windshield is a good 6 inches below that, and I have trouble seeing the car in front of me, much less the stoplight that's 6 feet in front of me and 8 feet straight up. (And that's usually the dealbreaker)

/Heck, on days where my back is acting up and decides not to bend right, I have real problems getting into my current land yacht.//Luckily, I don't drive enough to care about the difference between my current 18 MPG, and your 40+MPG. Total, gas is maybe $100/month.///Also, tricycleracer,what car is that? The stoplight issue might be a dealbreaker, but that looks way more comfy than my current car.

meyerkev:With that said, can you guys hold off a bit until they come out with quick-recharging batteries so I can actually use my car for more than 100 miles a day, and then wait some more until they come out with electric cars that I can actually fit into? There's no freaking way I can drive an electric Prius. I can't even get into a new Camry.

It took me whopping 15-minutes to recharge my car in downtown Seattle last week. Drove 150 miles that day, with a single recharge.

FTFA : "California says that zero-emission or plug-in hybrid vehicles will account for one in seven new cars sold in California in 2025 - or 15.4 percent."

Relax, guys. About 1.5 million new cars are sold in California each year, with only about 17,000 electric cars total ever sold in the Golden State. Sell 231,000 A YEAR within a little over a decade? Somebody at CARB has been smoking their medical ganja a little too much lately, methinks.

Reminds me of the CARB proclamation of 1990, that by 1998 2% of new cars sold would have to be electric; 5% by 2001 and 10% by 2003.

Yeah...no. Never happened, and CARB had to embarrassingly back down a few years after the big splash. Same thing will happen here.

meyerkev:DrPainMD: "The Air Resources Board expects that nearly 100 percent of all cars sold in the Golden State will be zero-emission vehicles by 2040 under its rules."

IOW, by 2040, 98% of the people in California will be going to Oregon, Nevada or Arizona to buy their cars.

But then there's the "Fark You" smog test, and the (unconstitutional) $400 out-of-state "Fark You" car tax that they'll bring back because they have to pay the pensions.

/Seriously, CA, what are you doing with all this money? You have worse infrastructure than MI, double the tax rates, and none of the excuses of weather.

California's also quite a bit bigger than Michigan, has more people, has greater extremes of weather and altitude, and nowhere near twice the tax rates of Michigan, you lying sack of shiat; we discussed this a few days ago.

For those of you who missed the last time I did the math for manchild, the basic income tax rate here is about 25 percent (+1.05) greater than in Michigan, and sales tax rates have a similar spread (7.5% in CA vs. 6% in MI; CA has local options that raise the max to 10).

Last time I thought about it, California is at least 25 percent nicer than Michigan, so I hardly think the extra taxes are exorbitant.

wildcardjack:Wait until they discover where the emissions really are...

[www.tva.com image 495x306]

I'd bet a CNG car has a smaller carbon footprint than a similar sized EV. CH4 versus C1000H1

OK. Show me the numbers. You've made the claim, it's up to you to do the math. I will warn you that there are economies of scale in power generation, and large generators are inherently more efficient than small engines. There will be transmission losses to account for.

meyerkev:DrPainMD: "The Air Resources Board expects that nearly 100 percent of all cars sold in the Golden State will be zero-emission vehicles by 2040 under its rules."

IOW, by 2040, 98% of the people in California will be going to Oregon, Nevada or Arizona to buy their cars.

But then there's the "Fark You" smog test, and the (unconstitutional) $400 out-of-state "Fark You" car tax that they'll bring back because they have to pay the pensions.

/Seriously, CA, what are you doing with all this money? You have worse infrastructure than MI, double the tax rates, and none of the excuses of weather.

California does not have "double the tax rates of Michigan". Overall, they are probably the same, maybe even lower.

Prop 13 means that anybody who has owned the same house since the 1970's pays about the same amount of taxes they paid in the 1970's. Everybody else gets to pay higher taxes and gets lousy services to compensate.

Plus, Arnie lowered the car registration taxes so much so a system that was barely functioning due to the above fell apart due to lack of revenue.

Geotpf:I live in Riverside, California. I have my entire life. The difference in air quality between the 1980's and now is very, very noticeable.

But But FREEDOM! You no longer can smell the FREEDOM!

/sorry//Couldn't resist///Thrilled that CA rarely has smog days anymore - we used to hear about that back in the 80s and very early 90s and would hope action could be taken to correct it. The photos of LA on a smog day in the 80s looked... poisonous.

MrSteve007:DrPainMD: "The Air Resources Board expects that nearly 100 percent of all cars sold in the Golden State will be zero-emission vehicles by 2040 under its rules."

IOW, by 2040, 98% of the people in California will be going to Oregon, Nevada or Arizona to buy their cars.

I have a feeling that when gas prices are $17 a gallon, not that many people will be driving combustion powered vehicles, let alone driving long distances to get one.

Resource substition begins to look attractive at $5 a gallon, given how the cost of the tech has come down. Kind of a no-brainer at $8. I doubt we will ever see $17/gallon gas (in 2013 dollars - if we inflate the currency at the current rate, it might be $17 in 2040 dollars), as demand will crater long before that point. There are alternatives - we just have a complex decision to muddle through to figure out what the next ubiquitious personal transportation tech will be. Hopefully we just go electric and avoid a CNG -> electric converstion 100 years from now.